Can those living today live forever?

Post Reply New Topic

eternal life within the universe is one thing. how do you expect to still *exist* in some way after everything else have ceased? we are talking pure theory now or am I missing something?

Well lets say there will be a point in time where everything ceases to exist and there is nothing but emptyness. If this is the case, then there is no way to make yourself an exeption. If for any reason this is possible, existance would be pointless anyway.

point or pointlessness is not really an issue here- it's a subjective matter. how would you expect to achieve this at all in the first place, that's what I'm really curious about.

Probably some kind of anticipated cohesion or displacement - it's not as if I'd be short of time to figure it out, and that's only an issue if the universe is finite.

If you were immortal there would be time enough to figure everything out, you could devote eons to discovering everything there is to discover, studying everything there is to study, knowing everything there is to know. It would be so exciting to be given that opportunity.
You could come up with grand unification and strings and blah blahs no one knows about yet. You would have the endless time to do all that. Sometimes it takes generations to figure things out but you could be the generations....every generation, lol. Every generation would be you because you would be eternal.
Still, you could create other generations and develop the technology to do it in ways that haven't been discovered yet. Artificial ways. Men could be mothers. Women could be fathers. You never know.

For some reason, scientists in some of the crazier parts of the world have discovered how to turn bone marrow into sperm, and make artificial wombs within a mans abdomen! Freaky - pointless - stuff.

Ishmael said:

A hologram made by a pulsed gamma laser. The original hologram would have to be enlarged in the process of recording or there would be data loss in the recording media due to interference with the particles in the media. The hologram could record all the quantum states simultaneously. It could then be scanned and backed up by a more durable data storage device, whatever that may be, certainly not anything in common use today. Actually, simply transmitting the data would constitute storage as it travels serially through the space-time continuum away from this planet at the speed of light, perhaps being received by superior extraterrestrial intelligences capable of reassembly when it arrives oodles of light-years away in the future. I do not expect the creation of the hologram to be necessarily destructive to the original living person.
edit:
And, if you are near death, you could receive a reflected signal from a solar system of appropriate distance, clone yourself with the data returning from space, then have a brain transplant into the clone, add some stem cells to rejuvenate your brain, then with all your memory intact you continue forward in time, resetting your biologic life time again to the time when you were scanned and ...um... "beamed up".

This conversation kind of reminds me of the Sealab episode where everyone was talking about putting their brain in a robot body. Funniest episode ever IMO.

you can not fear death when you are dead i agree.
but you can fear it before you are dead.
fear of non existence is quashed when it happens.


ok. that is usual for me.


to live after all else has passed, is to be stuck, wide awake in eternal nothingness.

i would not be actually "scared" if that was my fate. i would be very low of spirit though. i would try to "sleep" it through. but i would unfortunately "wake" regularly to see nothing again. every time. eternally.

maybe you are so hyper, that you would not even want to "sleep" for an instant to miss any part of the unfolding nothingness that is all there is left to be beheld...forever.


if i have forever to consider what are now only memories of what i saw in the once existent universe, then at some point i would have covered the lot.

at that point it would be like a prisoner in solitary confinement who does his crossword puzzle in pencil so he can rub it out and do it over and over again.
what a fate.

again i say "no thanks" to that "fatal" prospectus.




it is not cowardice. it is a strongly demanded choice that i do not experience eternal nothingness.

i would resist that fate with a mega tantrum.
not because i "fear" it, but because i intensely "do not want it".

you consider yourself to be almost "heroic" in your essence, but i say some "hero's" are actually people who have limited senses of danger due to psychological reasons.

there are some people who's "heroic" actions are ill considered.
for example:
a person runs out into the the field of fire in a battle because he thinks that he will distract the enemy, and is shot dead immediately.
also the enemy sees where he ran from, and concentrates fire on that position and kills his comrades.

his action was describable as "heroic" but it was stupid.

"bravery" is not a guarantee of correctness of action.





uh huh.

err...i...do not really....

have you been drinking? that sentence is very cryptic if it is lucid.



there may be an element of psycopathy in you i surmise.
do you also not sense danger?

like will you floor your car through a set of red lights with your eyes closed and hope for the best?

things that can not feel fear, are doomed to an accidental death early.



what work?

i agree it is a very big deal.


how can you create more? you are vastly deluded if you imagine you can create material reality from nothing to use as ingredients.
you are imagining you can attain the power of god...to create new realities that you can be in using no ingredients. like miraculous inception or something.

well the only reality you could create, is the imagination that it all still exists, and work from there.

the only thing that would exist then is your imagination, and no new input will ever stimulate it again.

just recycled and rearranged thoughts you had previously would be all there is.






i am not ever lonely. i love my wild animals that visit me. i do not crave human company. i do not really like it much anyway.
but if i live, then i want other life to live too. not necessarily humans, but animals of some lovable kind.

once all other life is gone, i will feel lonely. i know it very clearly.


that is kind of relieving for me to hear.
i am also glad that i can not identify with you.

if i did, i would be worried about my sanity.

not because i think you are not sane, but because i know i am so different than you that i feel very comfortable not being like you.





yes but it has to be still in existence.

We need to do some more research with Hydras, they are biologically immortal.

B9, though you may not realize it, you've highlighted several of my points and badly misunderstood many. Your comment about a soldiers bravery was distinctly offensive.
You have a jaded view of what composes reality and strength of character. Perhaps you ought to interact further with humanity before commenting on it, or reserve judgement until you've more experience.

there is no resolution that can "record" subatomic building blocks.
i mean the sub particles (or energy concentration points as they are at that level) that make subatomic particles.
whatever the recording device is, it must be composed of a lattice that is sub particular.

magnification is just something you propose with no idea how to achieve it.
also "magnification" results in loss of resolution.

just enlarge any pic you have by 10 times and you will see that much data is irresolute.

a picture of a shoe on a sidewalk taken by a satellite is making use of variable magnification with preset resolution capacities.

the more one zooms in, the grainier the result is.

to magnify yourself so that spurious interferences can be filtered, is to reduce your actual resolution.

that will result in an incompletely detailed picture.




how exactly?
do you have concrete scientific ideas that you can employ? or is it just a novel writing excercize?


so what will it be? what is the backing for your assertion?


you obviously are aware that energy transmissions are laterally dispersive (in a radial sense) in their outward excursion.

even a finely focused laser that is one micron thick in one direction will be 10 mm thick when it strikes the surface of the moon.

your transmission data of your identity would travel in a widening path as it continued.

when it is eventually received, it will be severely degraded by radial de-resolution.

on top of this dilemma, there is the fact that space is not empty.
there are large solid objects and also particles all resident, with different trajectories, in interstellar and intergalactic space that would surely collide with elements of the transmission medium (radio? microwave?)

not all of your code would arrive intact.

so then we get to the "arrive" bit.
arrive where?

do you have a preconception as to which direction you should aim your transmission?

because if you do not, then to aim it in 360 degrees in both axes would require almost stellar energy to achieve (if you wanted the signal to reach other galaxies (but is would still be degraded badly when it got there)).






well i am not even going to respond to that except to say even if you are dreaming up a novel, you must have more substance than just "notional grabs".

sorry if i seem difficult.

maybe i should not have responded to this post. i am tired and my autism is very dominant and i will now go to sleep i hope.

ok. i trust you have the correct social perspective of what my post said.

i am nearly always wrong in things i say to people.
they always point it out.
but i still will say what i want.

i do not want to be wrong. i think i am right.
but i know i am probably not due to the howls of disapproval i get from those i speak to.

you may be younger than me, but i may never reach your age.

We could build an ark of a space ship and transport animals into new worlds, like Noah did.

b9 -
what kinds of animals visit you? I saw a squirrel earlier today, on the wall of my house, outside, his head was peaking in the kitchen window and it was cute. He looked at me for a few seconds and I started telling him he was cute and he turned and left.
The squirrels like the kitchen window ledge and sit on it from time to time trying to figure out how to get inside. I have two parakeets and I think the squirrels want some of their birdseed.
Also, wild birds have tried to fly through the window, all since I got parakeets. It's amazing how good they are at figuring out where the food is, even if it's for indoor pets.

Oh... I prefer to die... soon

i have noisy minors (they are little grey birds and they are innocently cute) and there is a family of 8 of them who's territory is around my house.

i have 6 kookaburras who land on my railing every afternoon and they start chuckling and then get more and more "chuckly" before bursting into hysterical "laughter" (one of their names is "chuckles"). they like that time of day and they always line up in the same order to be fed beef strips i cut for them. they are also all related to each other and my area is their territory. (they mate for life and live about 20-30 years)

i have god knows how many rainbow lorrikeets (about 30? at times). they eat seeds on the lawn.

(i better speed this up as it is off topic (i have been warned many times on forums because i am an "off topicaholic"))

i have also 5 rosellas and 2 galahs and one other type of parrot that i do not know the name of.

there is a menacing rise in the number of destructive squawky cockatoos (about 12 now) that are visiting every day (they are brutal hogs that greedily eat everything and chase the other parrots away). they damage things by biting them aggressively while screeching an ear splitting screech.


i have 2 magpies and 3 kurrawongs.
that is all for the birds (i think)

i have 7-8mice that live behind the shed who come up to my porch to eat seeds and muesli i put out. they eat right at my feet. they are not scared at all.
they are very cute.

and at night, i have 4 possums that come here and stay around and i give them seeds and muesli.
2 come inside sometimes.


we have no squirrels in australia. i would like to have a squirrel come here. they are very cute.

my possums are a bit like squirrels. they have bushy tails, and they sit on their hind leags and eat from their hands (which are prehensile).
if they are eating grains, of course they eat from the floor like a cat, but if i give one a banana or a cob of corn, they sit like a squirrel and hold and the corn in their hands.
they are not nearly as quick witted as squirrels unfortunately, and they are easy prey for predators (which makes them even more lovable to me). you could shine a torch at a possum and point a gun at it and it would just sit there and look at you with bewilderment.
marsupials seem to have a slightly slower metabolism than mammals.



yes they visually look for food i think. not like dogs for example which follow scents, birds i think find their food mainly with vision.

i bought some seeds once that were in a box (i usually get clear plastic bags). this box was a "trill" brand box, and it had a very narrow clear plastic "window" slot in the box so you could see some seeds.

the box was unopened on a chair in the living room, and there were cockatoos all in the tree outside the nearest window who were looking only at that plastic window in the box.

i have a recent video of the lorikeets all trying to bite through a glass window (that they somehow did not know exists), a seed bell placed cruelly on the inside window sill. i can not find it however.



maybe you are joking, but i do not know.
so i will address it seriously in case you are serious.

the task is almost insurmountable.

i will try not to ramble and i will just try to say some considerations to take account of.

you would not only have to get a pair of every animal and insect, you also would need every plant species and every bacteria species and every virus species and also you would have to take geological (soils) samples from all the areas you collect from.

each plant needs it's particular blend of nutrients, and to think of calculating the necessities of all those species (countless) is beyond the entire human races capacity as yet.

if you did not take ALL the biological situation from earth to a new suitable destination, then the new world would fail.
everything is so interdependent on everything else.
bacteria in the gut of many animals is essential for their digestion.

viral infections in plants can produce development of mutations that continue the evolution of life after it has reestablished.

bacterial diseases kill certain animals at a high rate, which the animal has evolved to counter by extreme population expansion through multiple offspring.
if this disease does not come on the trip, then there is a major imbalance of advantages and detriments that result in a chaotic collapse of "eco equilibrium" (i hope that word exists).

what i am trying to say without giving infinite examples, is that the conditions for every aspect of every life on earth, is set by the conditions of what it depends upon, and what we depend upon is also dependent on it's own conditions of what it depends upon etc etc.

eventually, the "biological soup" (ie all species of plant and animal) of earth flows and mixes in such subtle ways, and this provides the delicate conditions for continual evolution (i know that is put in a simplistic way).

if this environment can not be preserved (in suspension of course) on the "ark" then all is lost.

if we did not put the process into suspension, then as we left the field of solar radiance needed for the trees etc, they would die.

i mean in the darkness of intergalactic space , an unsuspened environment would die.
i know you can see stars in interstellar, and to a lesser degree, in intergalactic space,
but feeble "star shine" is not enough to keep a jungle alive.

unless you have the means to artificially illuminate them for epochs (with no nearby energy source) then they will die. no matter how charged your batteries, you can not provide light equal to sunshine over epochs of time.

life must be suspended.
that is the next hurdle.

forget about the details of that hurdle for now.

if life was suspended, then the environment that it created that it needs to live will evaporate.

so the "environment" also has to be suspended.

and what good is that anyway?
because when a destination planet is arrived at, it's environment must be displaced and eradicated immediately to introduce our own.
if it has life then it is a bio hazard to us and we are to it.

so we would have to find a "dead" planet that has all the requirements for life. this may be impossible, because if a planet has all the requirements to support life (like temp>0c and < 100c with water and oxygen) then it would already have life.

it is obvious that if there were another planet EXACTLY like earth (theoretical perfect duplicate) then it would contain life exactly as ours does.

but there is no planet exactly like the earth (by "exactly" i mean "in every aspect of possible analysis has the same value").

so there is no life exactly the same as ours.
but there is certainly life everywhere that can support life.
life is pretty powerful.
it can be supported in many hostile places.
but life is fragile in that it does not exist where there are no ingredients for it to feed upon.

so if we had an ark and were off to a destination which we predefined as suitable (certainly we would want to have a target when we set off on the journey), then when we got there, we would be faced with the moral dilemma of deciding whether to eradicate life on that planet.

the chances for corruption of genetic integrity of our "cargo of hopes" for earth can never be risked by exposure to foreign bodies as foreign as they are.

you can not send down guinea pigs from your populations to study how they fare on the planet.

you only have 2 (or maybe more but i think 8 of each hedges against inbreeding) of each.
too precious.

so blast it!. the planet is "occupied" you say when you get there.
it certainly will be occupied you know.

anyway it is all too far away from my time in history to ponder.

the sun will be acceptable to live "under" for about another 5 billion years.

by that time we will not recognize the form of humans if they are here, which i sincerely doubt.

the dinosaurs lasted 180 million years and humans about 1 million so far. (2 million years ago they were not really human. but they were more than apes)

there is not much likelyhood that a species can stay in production for 5,000 million years you must admit.

we looked like apes only 4 million years ago, and now we look this way.

if you extenuate the morphing vectors between an ape's and our skull achieved in only 4 million years, 5000 million years into the future, you get something that is grotesquely unfamiliar to the sensibilities.

so when is it time to build the ark and go?
now? no way.
life on earth is too good.

the extreme measure of desperation of such an escape as casting off in the ark could only be justified in the final stages of the biological emergency that will be happening around 4.5-5 billion years from now.

so the biogenetic stock alive at that time, would be what we would be going with in the ark.

i have little idea what it will be like when life on earth is looking like it is coming to an end.


i would prefer to be not alive when it is time to leave the planet because it is finished..

to build an ark is not possible for my mind to achieve a complete design for.
it is a job for a race of far advanced minds to consider either in the distant future, or to be considered in different worlds where they are much more intellectually evolved.
.

i could not perform the task with all the resources that could ever be given to me to try with.

g'night